Explore the vast range of titles available.

It is estimated that nearly 20 million adults in the United States have a substance use disorder (SUD), and 8.4 million of those adults have a comorbid mental disorder. Roughly half of those adults with a SUD and a psychiatric comorbidity fail to receive adequate treatment for either the SUD or the mental disorder (combined or separately). However, this sub-population has shown positive treatment outcomes (e.g., improved quality of life and increased length of stay in a recovery home) when allotted the proper resources to treat the overlapping symptomologies associated with their multiple diagnoses. Many individuals with SUD and psychiatric comorbidity receive community-based support from recovery residences, a ubiquitous form of aftercare treatment in the United States. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between psychiatric severity index scores (a proxy for psychiatric comorbidity that measures social functioning, impairment, symptoms, and behavior), length of stay in Oxford Houses (OHs), and quality of life. The present study found a significant negative relationship between length of stay and psychiatric severity scores, and between psychiatric severity scores and quality of life scores. Psychiatric severity was observed to predict decreased quality of life, while length of stay predicted decreased psychiatric severity. Psychiatric severity mediated the relationship between length of stay and quality of life based on house composition.

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and recovery homes that have traditionally served those not taking medications for their recovery are important resources for treating opioid use disorder. However, little is known whether such recovery homes are a good fit for persons utilizing MOUD, and whether residents’ characteristics such as drug histories and the composition of recovery homes in terms MOUD and non-MOUD residents are related to attitudes toward MOUD. The present investigation examined characteristics of persons utilizing MOUD, and attitudes regarding MOUD utilization among residents living in recovery homes (Oxford Houses, OH) in the U.S. consisting of MOUD and non-MOUD residents. Residents living with others who were utilizing MOUD reported more favorable attitudes than residents who were not living with such residents, but this was observed only among residents whose primary drug of choice involved heroin or opioids. There were no significant differences observed in terms of abstinence rates, involvement in 12-step groups, or previous MOUD treatments between residents utilizing or not utilizing MOUD. Findings suggest that persons utilizing MOUD benefit by recovery homes such as OHs whose residents have favorable attitudes toward MOUD, especially when living with fellow residents who utilize MOUD.

Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone are medication assisted treatment (MAT) options for treating opioid use disorder, yet attitudes regarding their use within abstinence-based recovery homes have not been assessed. The present investigation examined attitudes regarding MAT utilization among residents living in Oxford Houses. This cross-sectional investigation compared residents ( n  = 87) receiving MAT whose recent drug use involved opioids, and two groups not receiving MATs; those who had used opioids and those who had used substances other than opioids. The vast majority of residents were not receiving MAT, yet 32% reported MAT histories. Negative attitudes regarding MAT were observed among residents who were not receiving MAT. Those presently receiving MAT reported mixed attitudes regarding the use of methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone, and two of these residents reported they had never been prescribed MAT. Findings suggest that abstinence-based recovery homes such as Oxford Houses may not be optimal resources for persons receiving MATs.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between psychiatric severity and stress among persons utilizing medication assisted treatment (MAT), and there is a need to identify resources that promote resilience against these risk factors. Although recovery homes might complement pharmacological interventions for persons using MAT, a lack of homophily (e.g. similar experiences) among residents could produce stress and increase psychiatric severity. The purpose of this paper is to examine stress and psychiatric severity in relation to recovery outcomes, and whether homophily moderated these relationships. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional analysis was conducted among recovery home residents who were recruited from the USA, including those using (n = 40) and not using (n = 132) MAT. Participants’ levels of psychiatric severity, stress, abstinence self-efficacy and quality of life were assessed in addition to whether residents using MAT were living with at least one other resident who used MAT. Moderated mediation analyses were conducted to examine whether homophily among residents using MAT would moderate the mediating effects of stress on the relationships between psychiatric severity and recovery outcomes (abstinence-self efficacy, quality of life). Findings Mediating effects were observed but they were significant only through homophily. Although stress increased the negative effects of psychiatric severity among residents using MAT, significantly lesser effects were observed among those living with residents using MAT. Practical implications Although psychiatric (problem) severity and stress threaten recovery for persons with substance use disorders, little is known how they impact recovery among those living in community-based settings such as recovery homes. In addition, there is a need to identify community resources that would complement MAT protocols, as patients who use MAT face unique stressors related to their sense of shared interests and experiences (i.e. homophily) when developing social bonds with others in recovery. Social implications This study suggests the social networks within recovery homes reduce the effects of psychiatric severity and stress, and that these effects are lessened for residents who use MAT when they live with others who also use MAT. Originality/value Little is known about recovery home residents who use MAT and have high psychiatric severity. Findings suggest homophily among persons using MAT living in recovery homes who have high psychiatric severity can promote resilience.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in the author group, where co-authors Isabel Dovale, Noah Gelfman and Sarah Callahan were missed to include and Brandon Isler should be removed from the author group.

A comparative analysis of recovery resources (abstinence social support, abstinence self-efficacy) was conducted among two groups exiting inpatient treatment for substance use disorders: persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders and persons with substance use disorders. Both groups reported comparable levels of abstinence social support, but this resource was not significantly related to substance use among persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders. Although abstinence self-efficacy was significantly related to substance use, persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders reported significantly lower levels of abstinence self-efficacy than persons with substance use disorders. Findings suggest that persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders exit alcohol/drug treatment with lower levels of abstinence self-efficacy compared to their substance use disorder peers.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compare the effects of two types of community-based, residential treatment programs among justice involved persons with dual diagnoses. Design/methodology/approach – A randomized clinical trial examined treatment conditions among justice involved persons with substance use disorders who reported high baseline levels of psychiatric severity indicative of diagnosable psychiatric comorbidity. Participants (n=39) were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions upon discharge from inpatient treatment for substance use disorders: a professionally staffed, integrated residential treatment setting (therapeutic community), a self-run residential setting (Oxford House), or a treatment-specific aftercare referral (usual care). Levels of psychiatric severity, a global estimate of current psychopathological problem severity, were measured at two years as the outcome. Findings – Participants randomly assigned to residential conditions reported significant reductions in psychiatric severity whereas those assigned to the usual care condition reported significant increases. There were no significant differences in psychiatric severity levels between residential conditions. Research limitations/implications – Findings suggest that cost-effective, self-run residential settings such as Oxford Houses provide benefits comparable to professionally run residential integrated treatments for justice involved persons who have dual diagnoses. Social implications – Results support the utilization of low-cost, community-based treatments for a highly marginalized population. Originality/value – Little is known about residential treatments that reduce psychiatric severity for this population. Results extend the body of knowledge regarding the effects of community-based, residential integrated treatment and the Oxford House model.

A longitudinal analysis of psychiatric severity was conducted with a national sample of recovering substance abusers living in Oxford Houses, which are self-run, self-help settings. Outcomes related to residents’ psychiatric severity were examined at three follow-up intervals over one year. Over time, Oxford House residents with high versus low baseline psychiatric severity reported significantly more days using psychiatric medication, decreased outpatient psychiatric treatment, yet no significant differences for number of days abstinent and time living in an Oxford House. These findings suggest that a high level of psychiatric severity is not an impediment to residing in self-run, self-help settings such as Oxford House among persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders.

Acidification of lakes and rivers is still an environmental concern despite reduced emissions of acidifying compounds. We analysed trends in surface water chemistry of 173 acid-sensitive sites from 12 regions in Europe and North America. In 11 of 12 regions, non-marine sulphate (SO4*) declined significantly between 1990 and 2008 (−15 to −59 %). In contrast, regional and temporal trends in nitrate were smaller and less uniform. In 11 of 12 regions, chemical recovery was demonstrated in the form of positive trends in pH and/or alkalinity and/or acid neutralising capacity (ANC). The positive trends in these indicators of chemical recovery were regionally and temporally less distinct than the decline in SO4* and tended to flatten after 1999. From an ecological perspective, the chemical quality of surface waters in acid-sensitive areas in these regions has clearly improved as a consequence of emission abatement strategies, paving the way for some biological recovery.

We investigate whether communication strategies that portray climate change as a nonlinear phenomenon provoke increases in laypeople’s climate change risk perceptions. In a high-powered, preregistered online experiment, participants were exposed to linear or nonlinear predictions of future temperature increases that would be expected if global greenhouse gas emissions were not reduced. We hypothesized that the type of climate change portrayal would impact perceptions of qualitative risk characteristics (catastrophic potential, controllability of consequences) which would, in turn, affect laypeople’s holistic risk perceptions. The results of the study indicate that the type of climate change portrayal did not affect perceptions of risk or other social-cognitive variables such as efficacy beliefs. While participants who were exposed to a nonlinear portrayal of climate change perceived abrupt changes in the climate system as more likely, they did not perceive the consequences of climate change as less controllable or more catastrophic. Notably, however, participants who had been exposed to a linear or nonlinear portrayal of climate change were willing to donate more money to environmental organizations than participants who had not been presented with a climate-related message. Limitations of the present study and directions for future research are discussed.